Turn your noisy tv down or off? Ken allegedly did: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFFMtq5g8N4
My assumption is:
Every unenlightened mind is conditioned to search for answers, meaning, pleasure. Enlightened minds fully free from conditioning may not need to search. None of us here is I believe enlightened, assuming such a ‘state’ exists.
Is continuous thought, the stream of content, the cause and sustainer of this condition?
The stream definitely correlates with and sustains the search. But it may be a manifestation rather than the source. Perhaps we are born with an instinct to realize our most profound birthright and searching is a necessary step?
Curiosity is natural, but searching is neurotic, a symptom of suffering. Searching is for the end of searching, i.e., arrival, achievement, success, The End, whereas curiosity has no motive and life wouldn’t be worth living without it.
I understand but searching may be a ‘mistake’ we need to make, until we don’t.
Clearly it’s a mistake to search for what I think, imagine, believe I must find when my problem is incessant thinking, imagining, and believing.
1 Like
The pivotal term (and mistake) seems to be the ‘incessant’ nature of your thinking, not the thinking itself. Is thinking ‘tamable’? Is it possible for it to serve rather than master?
The Tibetan Buddhist meditation teacher Yongey Mingyur Rinpoche said something interesting about the nature of thought. Thought always wants to be ‘doing.’ It’s unhappy when it’s idle, gets anxious and starts making trouble. This interferes with and undermines meditation of pretty much any ilk. His suggestion is to give thought something to do, a neutral task that will keep it happily occupied. (Kind of like how you’d deal with a hyper child.) It doesn’t really matter what thought does, as long as it’s neutral: body scan, breath counting, mantra repetition. Happily occupied thought eventually loses its bully-ness or peters out on its own. This is a way to work with rather than against thought’s natural tendencies. It’s a kind of mind hack, not meant to replace Krishnamurti’s views on thought and meditation, just offer an alternative.
Can thought ‘tame’ thought? Can the fox come up with a better method to protect the chickens?
In oneself, one sees that when there is stilness there is joy, peace, no centre, no time. But brain goes back to chattering. Why does it abhors stilness when there is joy in it and goes back to chattering ?. There seems to be something more but unable to pin it.
I had tried this mantra repeation. In the begining it is very good, one even feels some joy in it. But latter on it becomes mechanical, leading to no attention and chattering as before. Of course when mind is too chattering, mantra repeation is good for time being.
Perhaps intelligent thought (thought serving rather than mastering) can tame itself?
This is the big hard question! What do you think?
Is useful I think to have a set of ‘tasks’ for thought to perform, when a task stops working then you move to the next task.
I wouldn’t compare incessant thought with an animal that can be tamed and put to use by humans because thought is not an animal but a mechanism operating in a disorderly way. Unless the brain is aware of and interested in what it’s doing, it can’t/won’t do anything to address its dysfunctional operation.
Is it possible for it to serve rather than master?
Of course, but only if the brain cares enough to attend to its every thought and intention. The more aware the brain is of what it’s doing, the more likely it is to correct itself.
Are you saying that…
thought is a wily predator, or that the brain is a wily predator?
the brain would rather stream its content than do no harm?
K. Has suggested that the ‘thinker’ (you/me) was a “trick” of thought’s- you are suggesting it was not by thought but would have to be a duality that the brain created…Regardless, that seems to be our situation. My point was that ‘meditating’ to bring a result: silence, peace, joy etc is fine but it doesn’t address the suggestion that: “you don’t exist”. Which seems to be the number one point. The brain exists, thought exists… but you don’t. It’s all a game by the brain with thought / feeling?
My point is that there is nothing one can do but awaken to the fact that there is nothing more important, more urgent, than understanding why the is operating the way it does.
“you don’t exist”. Which seems to be the number one point. The brain exists, thought exists… but you don’t. It’s all a game by the brain with thought / feeling?
The “number one point” is that the brain is dysfunctional, doesn’t know why, and doesn’t care enough to be mindful of what it’s doing.
We know that its dysfunctional operation creates and sustains the illusion of self, I, me, mine, and the practice of believing, but these are only symptoms, harmful and destructive as they are.
The conditioned brain can’t stop believing that I exists even when it claims not to believe that I exists. When/if the brain actually sees the illusory nature of I, me, mine, the brain has come to order.
True. Difficult to answer. Could it be that for brain, continuity of “I” is far more important than joy of stilness.
Is not moving to another task is repetition of old in different form ?
It seems that repetition of Mantra or traditional methods of meditation will work only when they are practiced continually non stop for long period of time to make the brain still and silent which is not possible in present day.
It is like a spring can be made to loose its capacity to spring back only when it is kept pressed for years together.
That is why K’s teaching are very relevant today. One need not go to mountains/caves to do japa or traditional meditation but to live in the moment with awareness. As Inquiry has pointed out it is easy if brain is really interested in discovering what it is doing in moment to moment.